Deadline Looms for Congress to Renew Critical Funding Program for Rural Schools

Majority-Black, rural school districts in Mississippi like the one where Jacqueline Brown has taught for 17 years cannot afford budget cuts.

It’s already difficult to recruit a certified math teacher or offer additional incentives to retain experienced educators who are nearing retirement in a rural area, she said.

One federal program that helps rural counties navigate such challenges is the Secure Rural Schools (SRS) program. Brown’s state received $2.2 million from the program, which supports schools, roads, emergency services and other municipal services. These funds have kept rural counties afloat, especially facing declining populations, sinking tax bases and limited state funding.

But, last month, as Congress scrambled to prevent a government shutdown, lawmakers failed to renew funding for the program.

As a result, rural communities in over 700 counties will lose millions of dollars, forcing counties to delay road improvements and school districts to consider staff layoffs and cuts to extracurricular activities or after-school programs. Education advocates worry the lack of resources could further deepen existing disparities, especially for Black rural communities that often are invisible to policymakers.

“Every student should have access and opportunities and resources, and it shouldn’t be determined by the ZIP code,” said Becky Pringle, president of the National Education Association. “Kids need access to a science lab, but they also need access to arts and music. They also need access to after-school programs and sports. They also need a rich, diverse, inclusive curriculum. … They can’t have it all because they don’t have the resources.”

In 2016, the only other year the program’s funding expired, one school district in California couldn’t afford to make repairs to school buildings, which caused toxic mold outbreaks at several campuses. If Congress does not address the funding shortfall, the superintendent fears the district will have to downsize, which will lead to bigger class sizes and fewer enrichment programs. In southeast Alaska, school leaders say the funding loss will be “dramatic” as school districts there are already facing budget deficits.

Less than a week after the Senate passed its bill to renew funding, a bipartisan coalition of 22 members in the House — including Democratic U.S. Reps. Joe Neguse, Bennie Thompson, Nikema Williams, Don Davis, and Sheila Cherfilus-McCormick — urged Republican House Speaker Mike Johnson to bring the legislation before Congress before the end of the year.

Despite the plea, Johnson did not bring the bill to a vote on the House floor before the end of the congressional session, leading to its failure. It wasn’t due to opposition or lack of support that it didn’t get passed; it was a matter of timing, Thompson told Capital B.

“I just think we just didn’t have enough time to get it across the finish line. I would say that we had a little small thing — like a presidential election — that took a lot of time away from it,” he said. “A lot of us are still here, and we see the benefit of that program. Don’t be disheartened. I’m convinced that before the funding runs out, we’ll have to reauthorize it.”

There will be one opportunity to pass a bill before the final budget deadline on March 14.

How Does the Secure Rural Schools Program Work?

For decades, the bipartisan Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-Determination Act has compensated county governments surrounded by a large share of non-taxable national forest land. The system was originally designed so that certain communities received a share of timber sales generated from national forest lands managed by the U.S. Forest Service. However, in the 1990s, timber sales significantly declined, and these communities, which had relied heavily on this revenue, began to face financial strain.

In response, Congress created the Secure Rural Schools program in 2000. This initiative replaced the previous revenue-sharing model, ensuring these communities and school districts continued to receive a stable funding source, even though they could no longer generate revenue from the timber sales on nearby federal lands.

Over the past 10 years, the Forest Service has distributed $2.4 billion through the program. The funding continues to plateau and fluctuate by county. In fiscal year 2010, lawmakers allocated more than $415 million, whereas the most recent amount is $232 million.

Advocates are calling for a more permanent funding solution for these rural areas, rather than relying on a two-year authorization, said Tara Thomas, government affairs manager of the American Association of School Administrators.

“It is unfair to put superintendents and schools and communities in this position of where they’re constantly fighting for what, frankly, they deserve,” Thomas said. “This isn’t a handout. This isn’t someone … being reliant on the federal government. This is something that they are owed because they are unable to generate revenue any other way because of the federal government.”

Ann Levett, assistant executive director of the Leadership Network for the American Association of School Administrators, expressed that the funding mechanisms are antique and inadequate.

“Even though people think we have too much, we simply do not collect enough tax money to meet all of the needs that are laid at the foot of the schoolhouse door,” she said. “If we say that we value schools, which play a critical role in caretaking and in educating, then we ought to find ways to finance them at suitable and appropriate levels, and I have not — in my long career as an educator — seen any successful effort to do that.”

Will Congress Reauthorize the Program Under This Administration?

It’s likely the program could be reauthorized this year.

Looking back to 2016, funding for the program lapsed before resuming in 2017. Oregon Public Broadcasting reported that GOP opposition in the House — similar to this past session — stalled progress on the bill. County payments returned to a revenue-based system, meaning they received payments based on revenue generated from fluctuating timber sales. In turn, they received significantly lower payments, according to a report by the Congressional Research Service.

Some lawmakers are making plans to get a bill passed.

Last week, U.S. Rep. Marie Gluesenkamp Perez of Washington state wrote House leadership to prioritize extending the SRS program. Congressional leaders such as Thompson of Mississippi and U.S. Sen. Ron Wyden of Oregon, a sponsor of the bill, told Capital B they are committed to getting funds to rural counties.

“This sad state of affairs due to congressional Republican failings is pointless and regrettable. But I am committed to working with anybody, anywhere, at the start of the new year who’s serious about reauthorizing these vital investments ASAP for rural communities in Oregon and nationwide,” Wyden wrote in a statement.

Despite this push, Brown, the educator in Mississippi, urged legislators to “look at funding through the eyes of what type of society am I trying to build” when making crucial decisions that impact students and their communities.

“If you’re in the rural area and you’re just trying to have broadband so that the kids can have access to the internet, you need as many funds as you can get to give the students the type of society that you want to create, or the type of legacy that you want to leave,” Brown said.